Nothing moves without money, Legalise corruption - SC

Nothing moves without money, Legalise corruption - SC

The Supreme Court has expressed concern over growing corruption in the government machinery, particularly in the income tax, sales tax and excise departments, saying “ nothing moves without money”. “It is very unfortunate that there is no control over corruption in the country. There is rampant

corruption, particularly in the department of income tax, sales tax and excise department. Nothing moves without money,” a Bench of Justices Markandeya Katju and T.S. Thakur said.

The apex court was admitting an appeal filed by the CBI challenging the acquittal of an income tax inspector, Mohanlal Sharma, by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Additional Solicitor General P.P. Malhotra, appearing for the CBI, submitted that Sharma was acquitted by the high court despite the trial court holding him guilty of demanding and accepting a bribe of R10,000 from an IT assessee. He was earlier sentenced to one year’s rigorous imprisonment by the trial court.

The bench said “why doesn’t the government legalise corruption so that a specific amount is fixed for every case... That way, every individual will know how much bribe he has to pay.”

It added sarcastically, “Poor government officials, we can’t blame them also because of the growing inflation.”

Sharma, who appeared in person, denied the allegation and said he was falsely implicated.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Nothing-moves-without-money-SC/H1-Article1-610994.aspx

Exchange of garlands is not marriage: SC

Exchange of garlands is not marriage: SC

New Delhi, Sep 22 (IANS):

The Supreme Court on Wednesday said the exchange of garlands between bridegroom and the bride in a temple could not be treated as marriage.

The marriage solemnised with full customary rites and ceremonies alone would get the sanctity of marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the apex court bench of Justice Markandey Katju and Justice T.S. Thakur said.

The court made these observations in the course of the hearing of a petition by one K.P. Thimmappa Gowda challenging his conviction by the Karnataka High Court for repeatedly having sex with a lady and impregnating her on the false promise of marrying her later.
The victim subsequently gave birth to a boy in 1996.

The accused Thimmappa, who was a teacher, was acquitted of the charges by the session court but his conviction was reversed by the high court.Both, the victim and the accused, were residents of Pallavanamashalli village in Shimoga district of Karnataka.

The court said that in the case of inter-caste marriage, the marriage may be solemnised in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies of either the bridegroom or the bride.Justice Katju said that if, according to customs, the marriage ceremony involves Saptapadi, then the marriage would be considered solemnised on the completion of the seventh step.

A teacher should be a role model but the petitioner Thimmappa is a stain on the profession of teaching, Justice Katju said. The court was appalled to note that the victim was Thimmappa's employee working on his agriculture fields. The court noted that Thimmappa exploited her poverty, repeatedly raped her and then abandoned her.The court said that the conduct of Thimmappa in refusing to accept the decision of the village panchayat to marry the victim was far from that of a gentleman.Subsequently, Thimmappa married another woman from whom he has two daughters.

Thimmappa's counsel offered Rs.2 lakh as alimony to the victim in return for his acquittal in the case. Justice Thakur said: “Let him save his two lakhs and spend seven years in imprisonment.” Describing the offer as ridiculous, Justice Thakur said that “no court would accept it”.

The court adjourned the matter by four weeks during which Thimmappa would tell the court as to what amount he could offer the victim in terms of cash and agriculture land by way of settlement.

The court took note of the fact the child of the victim was already 15 years old and she was a single unwed mother.

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/98713/exchange-garlands-not-marriage-sc.html

Forget about freedom: SC to husbands

Forget about freedom: SC to husbands – Marry to be slaved by wife and her parents- husbands to become pet doggy

11 Jun, 2010, 02.53AM IST,IANS

NEW DELHI: Married men should forget about their freedom after they tie the nuptial knot as restrictions on their independence are like “dividends” they have to pay for matrimony, the Supreme Court said on Thursday in a divorce suit.

“Whenever a person is married, there is no question of independence,” Justice Deepak Verma said, hearing a divorce suit between Colonel Ajit Sharma (name changed) and his estranged wife and software professional Seema Sharma (name changed).

By making the observations, the court revisited the remarks of the vacation bench of Justice Markandey Katju and Justice Verma of 2009 wherein it had said: “Do what the wife tells you and never question her authority.”

Justice Katju had said: “If men want to rule their life then they should always be on the right side of their wife. Otherwise, a defiant husband’s life would be ruled by others.”

He said that if the “wife says turn right, turn right and if she says turn left, then turn left”. On Thursday, the observation about husbands surrendering their independence came when the court was told that Seema had wished “happy Independence Day” to her husband when both of them filed a divorce suit by mutual consent.

The bench of Justice Verma and Justice K S Radhakrishnan was hearing an appeal filed by Ajit seeking divorce from his wife. They have a 14-year-old daughter Priyanka (name changed) studying at a boarding school in Dehradun.

Initially, the court said: “We are not made to break up marriages.” Thereafter, the court counselled the couple to go for reconciliation. The two were told by the court that for them, the welfare and the future of their child should be the top priority.
However, soon realising that the couple could not live peacefully under one roof, the court worked out a package that could mitigate the difficulties of the mother who was to bring up Priyanka after separation.

The court asked Ajit to suggest a package that he was willing to offer his estranged wife so that she could bear the expenses of bringing up their daughter. The court said that the package should factor in inflation, price rise and the cost of child’s education, her marriage and other needs. It gave Ajit time to think over it.

When SC resumed hearing, Seema was told that besides Ajit bearing entire expenses of Priyanka’s education till senior secondary, he would pay her Rs 4 lakh and give a 250 square metre plot in Secunderabad in Andhra Pradesh.

Ajit said she could dispose the house to mop up more money. The package was in addition to the Rs 1.50 lakh that has already been given to Seema by him. An insurance policy of Rs 5 lakh in the name of their daughter has also been given to her.

After a second adjournment, Seema told SC that she wanted a plot of land in Delhi or Gurgaon and demanded an arrangement for their daughter’s education after school.

 

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Forget-about-freedom-SC-to-husbands/articleshow/6034997.cms

Rights of people to criticize judiciary-Hon'ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju

people have a right to criticize the judiciary as the people were supreme in a democracy, and all authorities including Judges were servants of the people

http://www.supremecourtofindia.nic.in/judges/bio/sitting/mkatju.htm

Can’t find your mum through writ, says Supreme Court

Can’t find your mum through writ, says Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the petition filed by Arun Dohle, 37, an Indian adopted by German parents, seeking the production of his biological mother. However, his search may have inched closer with the apex court allowing his lawyers access to the original documents of the adoption centre.

Shooting down the objections raised by advocate Neela Gokhle representing the Kusumbai Motichand Mahila Seva Gram (KMMSG) where Dohle was reportedly “abandoned” by his biological mother, the court said, “No national secret is involved in it and the days of privileged documents are over.”

Advocate Jamshed Mistry who was part of the legal team representing Dohle said: “The court’s direction reaffirms the Supreme Court guidelines as stated in 1984 and also the Hague convention to which India is a signatory.”

However, while dismissing Dohle’s appeal, justices Markandey Katju and TS Thakur said he could file a suit for seeking relief.
Dohle was two months old when a German couple, Michael and Gertrude Dohle, adopted him in 1973. He contested that he was abandoned by his mother and was given in adoption without her consent. He alleged that his adoptive parents were helped by union minister and NCP leader Sharad Pawar’s brother Pratap Pawar.

The judges said, “You don’t even know the identity of your mother. How can you find her through a writ petition? Unless you know
your mother, how can you say that she is in illegal detention?”
The judges observed that sometimes unwed mothers gave fictitious names to orphanages. On the judges’ query whether the ashram maintained any register, its counsel answered in the negative. Dohle’s counsel Shekhar Naphade said there was something fishy in the whole affair.

 

 

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_can-t-find-your-mum-through-writ-says-supreme-court_1424425

Allow compounding of cognisable offences including 498A cases, says SC

Allow compounding of cognisable offences including 498A cases, says SC

TNN, Aug 5, 2010, 03.28am IST

NEW DELHI: To lessen the huge pendency of cases and encourage conciliation among warring litigants, Supreme Court has urged the Centre and Law Commission to examine whether non-compoundable offences under IPC, including those under Section 498A, could be closed after the parties settled.

At present, cases in which a husband or his relative is booked under Section 498A for subjecting a woman to cruelty or anyone charged under Section 326 for causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapon or means fall under the non-compoundable category and courts are barred from closing the cases even after the opposing parties have reached an amicable settlement.

Looking at similar cases before the court and in particular a case under Section 326 where the parties had arrived at an amicable settlement, a Bench comprising Justices Markandey Katju and T S Thakur said, "There are several offences under the IPC that are currently non-compoundable. These include offences punishable under Sections 498A, 326 etc. Some such offences can be made compoundable by introducing a suitable amendment in the statute."

It added, "We are of the opinion that the Law Commission of India could examine whether a suitable proposal can be sent to the Union government in this regard. Any such step would not only relieve the courts of the burden of deciding cases in which the aggrieved parties have themselves arrived at a settlement, but may also encourage the process of reconciliation between them. We, accordingly, request the Law Commission and the government of India to examine all these aspects and take such steps as may be considered feasible."

The court asked the SC secretary general to send a copy of the order to the Law Commission and the law secretary. The Bench requested the law secretary to place this order before law minister Veerappa Moily.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Allow-compounding-of-cognisable-offences-including-498A-cases-says-SC-/articleshow/6257732.cms

What can we do, if our orders are not obeyed: Apex court

New Delhi, Aug 3

Hearing a plea seeking arrest of a politician's musclemen, the Supreme Court Tuesday said policing is not a part of its mandate and it could not help if its orders were not being executed by the law enforcing agencies.

"If our orders are not being obeyed, then what can we do? We are not police," said an apex court bench of Justice Markandey Katju and Justice T.S. Thakur.

The bench was disposing a petition seeking enforcement of its earlier order directing the arrest of alleged musclemen of former Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MP and Bihar's criminal-turned-politician Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav.

The petitioner Rabinder Nath Singh moved the apex court seeking direction for enforcement of its earlier order by which it had cancelled the bail of Pappu Yadav and had said that he should be taken into custody forthwith.

On May 3, the apex court cancelled the bail of Pappu Yadav who was earlier granted bail by the Patna High Court.

Appearing for the petitioner, senior counsel Amarendra Saran asked the court to issue direction for the immediate arrest of Pappu Yadav. He told the court that Pappu Yadav was absconding and the court should order his arrest.

At this, Justice Katju said that judges of the Supreme Court do not have a magic wand and could not be expected to do everything for the execution of their directions.

Justice Thakur said the petitioner could also move the high court for the implementation of the apex court's direction.

The bench asked the petitioner to approach the competent authority which would "do the needful" for the execution of the apex court's May 3 order directing the arrest of Pappu Yadav.

http://www.prokerala.com/news/articles/a156133.html